THE BIRDS OF AUSTRALIA. 
New Guinea, at least a number of birds, undoubtedly of a race hitherto 
undescribed, and in our opinion a form of A. fasciatus. We name this raice 
Accipiter fasciatus polycryptus, subsp. nov. It differs from (the males of) 
A. f. fasciatus very strikingly by the more reddish colour of the underside, with 
very narrow, in places obsolete, whitish bars and smaller size. It is therefore 
more similar to A. f, cruentus and didimus, but still more and lighter reddish 
underneath and less sharply barred, also markedly smaller. The colour of 
the upperside is also slightly more bluish. Tjrpe ^ ad. Sogeri district, 
2000-3500 ft., British New Guinea. Wing 230 mm.” 
While it would be easy to cite the above as confirmation of my subdivision 
and good judgment, I prefer to work to the facts. Rothschild and Hartert 
have not exactly quoted my localities for my races, as I called North-western 
birds A. f. didimus, and the West Kimberley bird would be there classed and 
not with A. f. cruentus. I will discuss these further on, but would here 
point out the puzzling item in Rothschild and Hartert’s note. They write 
“ undoubtedly of a race hitherto undescribed,” but from North’s note 
preceding, their race had “ undoubtedly been described ” by Ramsay as 
Ak sharpei. As I could scarcely believe such careful workers as Rothschild 
and Hartert could make such an obvious blunder, I have carefully studied 
North’s account of Ramsay’s birds and it seems strictly applicable to 
Rothschild and Hartert’s new subspecies. In this case it is very fortunate 
that Ramsay’s name is preoccupied. The only alternative is that they 
considered Ramsay’s name referable to some other bird, in which case they 
should have made a note to that effect. 
To return to Australian forms, when Hartert revived A. fasciatus he 
wrote {Nov. Zool., Vol. XII., p. 207, 1905): “The underside of this species 
is barred with brown and white, the white bars being as wide or a little 
narrower than the brown ones, which are rufous-brown, with darker edges. 
There is great variation in size, the females alone varying in the wing from 
268 to 291 mm. Males are strangely rare in collections, at least adult ones. 
They are sometimes exactly like the females, only smaller: sometimes, however^ 
much more reddish, but the dark bars of the under-surface paler, more 
reddish, the white ones narrower. Such specimens are hardly distinguishable 
from females of Astur torquatus torquatus from Timor, except that the bill is 
smaller. If they really are males they can only be the males of approximans. 
The males are very much smaller, the wings measuring only 228 to 247 mm. 
Specimens from Queensland, North and North-west Australia, agree fairly 
well with each other, though somewhat variable. A specimen shot in the 
‘ North of Victoria ’ is much darker brown above, and the brown bars below 
are very broad and dark. It is possible that a series shows similar differences. 
66 
